Reviews by johanlefourbe

20 years later, this movie has pretty much become the stuff of legends. Indeed, when it was released, it was a massive critical failure and many considered it as one of the worst movies ever made. The impact for Rob Reiner’s career would be quite dramatic and the guy never really fully recovered from the blow. Indeed, back in the 80’s, Reiner was one of the most successful directors at work. Just check his track-record, it is quite impressive (‘This Spinal Tap’, ‘The Sure Thing’, ‘Stand by Me’, ‘When Harry Met Sally...’, ‘Misery’, ‘A Few Good Men’). But, he will never come back to this level following this debacle. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, was it really so bad? To be honest, I don’t think so. I mean, sure, it was really weak and completely misguided and a massive failure coming from such a heralded director but I seriously don’t think it is one of the worst movies ever made. Indeed, Elijahd Wood who was just about 12 years old at the time, actually gave a decent performance which is even more impressive considering the poor material he had to work with. Anyway, even though I don’t think it deserves such an abysmal reputation, it is still a pretty weak movie and it is not really worth a look, I’m afraid.

When I was a kid, I saw ‘Honey, I Shrunk the Kids’ in the movie theater when it was released. Sure, it might not a masterpiece but, back then, I was just 10 years old, I thought it was really awesome and it has always remained a childhood favorite. Obviously, since the first installment was a success, they had to come up with this sequel. Apparently, it wasn’t really good since I didn’t hear anything about the damned thing when it came out and I completely missed it. Eventually, I saw it much later on and I thought it was just pretty lame. Of course, the fact that I wasn’t a kid anymore might have had an impact but, even so, the whole thing was just pretty tedious. I mean, sure, the concept did make sense after what happened in the first movie but it doesn’t mean that it did work. Indeed, in the first movie, the concept allowed the creation of a world full of neat possibilities but how much can you achieve with a giant toddler wandering around in Las Vegas? Not much, I’m afraid. To conclude, even though it could have been worse, the whole thing was pretty weak and I don’t think it is really worth a look.

Honestly, it is a rather obscure feature so I wasn’t sure what to expect from it but since I always had a weak spot for Neil Jordan’s work, I was quite eager to check it out. On top of that, the leads were played by Ralph Fiennes and Julianne Moore, some of the best actors around, so the whole thing definitely had some potential. Eventually, I guess it went by completely unnoticed because we have seen just too many similar movies in the past (the first that come to my mind would be the prestigious ‘Brief Encounter’) and, yet, I still had a weak spot for the whole thing. Indeed, even though the plot was nothing really original or ground-breaking, I thought that Fiennes and Moore both gave some fine performances and they both managed to make those characters quite compelling to behold. Concerning Neil Jordan, it must be one of his most straightforward and less challenging picture but I thought that most of what he did worked fine and it was just a nice watch. Anyway, to conclude, even though it might not be a masterpiece, I think it is a decent romantic feature and it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Honestly, I wasn't expecting much from this flick but since I had it like forever on DVD (I bought the damned thing almost 4 years ago!), I thought it was really time to watch this. Well, eventually, it turned out to be quite terrible and it is not very often that I came across such a confused picture. Indeed, basically, there was no real main plot, such a really awkward mix of various half-baked sub-plots. It is like Alicia Silverstone, she was shown prominently on all the promotional material but she wasn't in fact the main character but, once again, was Peter O'Toole the main character then? Probably not. By the way, it was just really embarassing to see such a great thespian in this pathetic production. On the other hand, in the 90's, he showed up in 'King Ralph' and in the 80's in 'Supergirl' which were also pretty abysmal so, apparently, the guy didn't always pick up the best projects. Concerning Alicia Silverstone, it has hard to believe that she was at some point considered as the next best thing but, with such lame movies, it is hardly surprising that everyone lost interest so quickly. Anyway, to conclude, the whole thing was seriously underwhelming and I don't see any reasons why you should waste your time with this flick.

I already saw this movie when it was released but, since it was a while back and since it was available on Netflix, I thought I might as well check it out again. The first time around I wasn't expecting much from this new installement but Nick, my step-son, had always been interested by dinosaurs so he was really eager to check this flick. Well, eventually, I have to admit that it actually turned to be a decent watch. Basically, it was half a sequel but also half a remake and even though it might sound like a poor idea, I thought that the whole nostalgia thing actually did work pretty well. Indeed, it was already 20 years ago that the first installment was released and I remember it as if it was yesterday. At the time, I was about 13-14 years old, I saw the damned thing in the movie theater when it was released and it was indeed quite spectacular. Here, they pretty much did exactly the same thing, with some kids being chased by some wild dinos within a brand-new theme park about dinosaurs. I usually wouldn't care for such rehash but, here, it was actually fairly entertaining. Still, the whole thing wasn't completely mind-blowing. First of all, there were just way too many half-baked sub-plots and, surprisingly, I thought that Chris Pratt was rather disappointing. While Bryce Dallas Howard who was in already her 4th sequel ('Spider-Man 3', 'Terminator Salvation' and 'The Twilight Saga: Eclipse') was fine, I thought Pratt was just rather boring and not really convincing as the typical macho hero. Sure, he didn't have to be exactly like Star-Lord but the way he played his character was just seriously underwhelming. Anyway, to conclude, all in all, I have to admit that it was a decent blockbuster and I think it worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I already saw this movie but since it was a while back and since it was available on Disney+, I thought I might as well check it out again. Well, at the end of the 80’s, Disney would make a massive come-back with ‘The Little Mermaid’ which started the era known as the Disney Renaissance. However, before this welcome renaissance, throughout the 80’s, pretty much all their movies were either some critical or commercial failures. This movie would be the last one they released before ‘The Little Mermaid’ and it was indeed pretty weak, I’m afraid, even if it turned out to be actually quite successful at the box-office when it was released. If I recall it correctly, I saw the damned thing in the movie theater when I was a kid and, sure, I thought it was watchable and I didn’t hate it at the time but it was nothing really memorable either. The main issue was that the concept was just so misguided. Indeed, in a similar fashion to what they did with their previous movie, 'The Great Mouse Detective', they used a classic story (‘Oliver Twist’ in this case) and substituted the main characters with some talking animals, mostly cats and dogs. However, it never worked as 'Oliver Twist' is actually a dark and gloomy story and to turn in into some cheerful musical was rather ludicrous. Seriously, if you would believe this movie, living in the street might not be so bad after all. On top of that, concerning the animation, the whole thing was fairly ugly and it was pretty much one of the cheapest looking productions they have ever released. Anyway, to conclude, I’m pretty sure it is one of the weakest animated features produced by this prestigious studio and I don’t think it is really worth a look, except maybe if you have some really young kids to entertain or if you are a die-hard fan of the genre.

It has been a while since I have seen this flick and maybe I will re-watch it at some point. Basically, even though I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie, since there was a decent cast, I thought I might as well give it a try and, eventually, I was actually positively surprised by the whole thing. Sure, like any other thriller, the plot was rather far-fetched but I thought that this story was still quite entertaining thanks to some solid directing and a very neat cast (Kevin Costner, Gene Hackman, Sean Young). Back in those days, Sean Young was still quite in demand and, unfortunately, it would be one of the last interesting movies that she would make. I think it is too bad because she definitely had some charisma but, apparently, she has a terribly lousy reputation and was/is pretty difficult to work with. Concerning Kevin Costner, the very same year, he gave his breakthrough performance in ‘The Untouchables’ and he would soon become one of the most popular actors in the world. To conclude, even though it might not be anything really groundbreaking, I think it is a really solid thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

Since '300' was quite a success at the box-office, it was only a matter of time before they came up with a sequel. Eventually, it took them 8 long years to come with a new installment and it is always risky to wait for so long since there is a fair chance that the audience wouldn’t care for it anymore which was apparently what happened to 'Sin City: A Dame to Kill For'. Anyway, I thought that this sequel was not bad but not really amazing though. I mean, first of all, in my opinion, '300' was pretty good but also rather limited and those limitations were even more obvious here. I mean, Leonidas was really missed here (apparently, Gerard Butler turned down this movie) and Themistocles was not really badass enough. Furthermore, this project was supposed to be about Xerxes which was a very neat idea and, indeed, you get a very quick bit explaining the origins of this character but, unfortunately, it was dropped very quickly and they decided to focus on Artemisia instead. Fortunately, Eva Green was really convincing and definitely the best thing in this movie. To conclude, all in all, it was still a decent watch and I think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

To be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this flick and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. Even though Brian De Palma is nowadays pretty much forgotten, I always had a weak spot for his movies, especially his earlier work. Indeed, back then, De Palma was the only man that could be considered as one of the very few directors managing to follow the footsteps of the great Alfred Hitchcock. With this movie, it was even more obvious since it was almost a remake of ‘Vertigo’ (apparently, Hitchcock himself was not amused by the similarities between both movies). Obviously, this movie never reached the level of Hitchcock’s masterpiece but I think it was still really entertaining. Indeed, something really specific about De Palma’s thrillers is the focus on how insane the characters tend to be. Sure, it is usually quite over-the-top, but, somehow, I always foudn this insanity quite compelling to behold. For De Palma, it would be his first box-office success and he would become one of the most sought after director for the next 20 years. To conclude, I think it is a pretty good thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you are interested in Brian De Palma's work.

Maybe you have noticed it but I’m extremely obsessive about my movie watching and one of my very first obsessions was to watch all the movies starring Robert De Niro. Nowadays, it has become a rather thankless task since the guy keeps showing up in some rather lame features, pretty much ruining his impressive legacy in the process, but I still managed to watch 71 movies starring this actor. Anyway, during this journey, I still managed to watch some pretty obscure flicks which were eventually not bad at all and this movie was definitely one of those. I mean, I have noticed that it has received some rather low ratings but I thought it was a decent watch. Irwin Winkler already made the rather obscure ‘Guilty by Suspicion’ also starring Robert De Niro and, just a year later, they were working again on this movie. Anyway, even thought the whole thing was nothing really original, the thing I really liked is that even though De Niro was playing a terrible loser, this character was still quite compelling to behold. To conclude, even though it was far from being a masterpiece, I thought it was a decent flick and I think it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.